Signs, whereby “Governmental Flags” are not subject to regulation. As currently written, the exemption could be interpreted as a content-based regulation with potential constitutional ramifications. The recommended clarifying language will make the regulation content-neutral by eliminating the word “governmental” and adding size and number regulations.

The second proposed amendment is for Section 1201.06(B), which requires that in the case of a multi-faced sign, all sides must be counted when calculating a sign’s surface area. This has proved to be a challenging and overly restrictive rule when dealing with temporary lawn signs, such as commonly used political signs. At the suggestion of City Council, staff has proposed language that would allow temporary lawn signs to be treated as single-sided for purposes of calculating sign surface area.

Mr. Jacques explained that he prepared a form for Planning Commission to submit their written findings of fact to City Council along with their recommendation. He prepared it as a fill-in-the-blank form so they could decide either way and write in any specific factual findings.

Mr. Jacques asked the Planning Commission to follow the decision standard as listed in Section 1003.6(B) of the Oakwood Zoning Code. The Code states “Text amendments shall be reviewed for consistency with the purposes of (the Zoning Code), the Comprehensive Plan, and interests of the city of Oakwood as a whole.”

Mr. Byington asked if the sign has to have the same image on both sides.

Mr. Jacques answered no; it would be treated as a single-sided sign regardless of the content.

Mr. Byington added that the sign could technically have eight images with four images on each side, and asked if that was intentional.

Mr. Jacques noted that as a general rule, if a sign has to be read to know how it is regulated, it is probably an unconstitutional regulation.

Mr. Hill inquired about neutral content signs.

Mr. Jacques stated that content does not factor into the treatment of signs.

Mr. Hill inquired about the impact on freedom of speech if political signs are regulated.

Mr. Jacques explained that the regulation would apply to all temporary signs, not just political signs. The message on the sign is not restricted, only the size and physical characteristics.

Mr. Byington asked if advertising signs are still prohibited.

Mr. Jacques answered yes, because courts have given more leeway when it comes to regulating commercial speech.

With no visitors present to offer public testimony, the public hearing was closed and the Planning Commission began their deliberations.

Mr. Aidt asked the other members of the Planning Commission if they had concerns with the proposed amendments to the sign regulations. The Commission did not have any concerns or further questions for city staff.